DOCSLIB.ORG

J. Wilson White

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
J. Wilson White J. WILSON WHITE Assistant Professor Dept. Fisheries and Wildlife Coastal Oregon Marine Experiment Station Hatfield Marine Science Center Oregon State University [email protected] EDUCATION 2007 Ph.D. Ecology, Evolution, & Marine Biology University of California, Santa Barbara 2000 B.S. Biology (with honors); magna cum laude Davidson College, Davidson, NC. PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 2017- Assistant Professor Dept. Fisheries and Wildlife, Coastal Oregon Marine Experiment Station Oregon State University 2016-2017 Associate Professor Dept. Biology & Marine Biology, University of North Carolina Wilmington 2010-2016 Assistant Professor Dept. Biology & Marine Biology, University of North Carolina Wilmington 2007-2010 Postdoctoral scholar Dept. Wildlife, Fish, & Conservation Biology and Bodega Marine Laboratory, University of California, Davis 2007 Graduate Research Assistant Partnership for Interdisciplinary Study of Coastal Oceans & Marine Science Institute, University of California, Santa Barbara 2001-2006 Graduate Research Assistant & Teaching Assistant Dept. Ecology, Evolution, & Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara 2000-2001 Teaching Assistant Duke University Talent Identification Program. 2000 Research Assistant J. Wilson White CV 2/7/18 p. 2 Univ. California, Davis. Santa Rita Experimental Range, Tucson, AZ 1998-2000 Research Assistant Dept. Biology, Davidson College, Davidson, NC GRANTS AND PROFESSIONAL AWARDS 2017 National Science Foundation – Biological Oceanography. Collaborative Research: Quantifying the influence of nonconsumptive predator effects on prey population dynamics. (with co-PI D. Kimbro) (OSU portion: $299,591) 2014 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency – Science to Achieve Results (STAR). Linking biological scales across generations: an estuarine and marine model for measuring the ecological impact of endocrine disrupting compounds. (with lead PI S. Brander and co-PIs A. Mehinto, R. Connon) ($399,971) 2014 National Science Foundation – Biological Oceanography. Collaborative Research: RUI: Effects of size-selective mortality on sex-changing fishes. (with co-PIs M. Steele, S. Hamilton, M. Adreani) (UNCW portion: $210,326) 2014 Florida Department of Environmental Protection. Florida’s imperiled Apalachicola oysters: paired experimentation, monitoring, and modeling to understand collapse of oyster reefs and to promote recovery. (with co-PIs D. Kimbro and C. Stallings) (UNCW portion: $109,753) 2013 UNCW eTEAL Pedagogy Initiative. Collaborative learning of population models for conservation biology. ($3500) 2013 NC Sea Grant. Population connectivity of southern flounder in the U.S. South Atlantic. (with co-PI F. Scharf) ($97,955) 2013 Florida Sea Grant. Installation of an oyster-reef monitoring framework throughout Apalachicola Bay, FL, to understand declining oyster landings and alternative management strategies. (with co-PI D. Kimbro) ($10,000) 2012 NC Division of Marine Fisheries. An acoustic tagging study to evaluate migration dynamics and within-estuary habitat use of southern flounder (Paralichthys lethostigma) in North Carolina. (with co-PIs F. Scharf, C. Collier, and C. Batsavage) ($227,989) 2011 NC Sea Grant. Spatial approaches to managing ontogenetically migrating fishes. ($27,000) 2011 UNCW Center for Marine Science Pilot Grant. Scaling up endocrine disruption effects in the Lower Cape Fear: from individual behavior to population dynamics. (with co-PI S. Brander) ($34,978) 2010 UNCW Cahill Research Award ($2880) 2009 California SeaGrant. Adaptive management of marine protected areas: predicting responses to MPA implementation for comparison to monitoring data (with PIs L. Botsford, M. Baskett, and A. Hastings) ($197,000) 2008 Resources Legacy Fund Foundation. Population modeling support for the California Marine Life Protection Act Initiative (with PI L. Botsford) ($65,000) 2006 UCSB Affiliates Dissertation Fellowship ($5000) 2006 UCSB Dept. of EEMB Ellen Schamberg-Burley Travel Grant ($425) J. Wilson White CV 2/7/18 p. 3 2004 USCB Graduate Division Travel Grant ($1300) 2002 Worster Foundation Grant for Undergraduate Mentoring ($5000) 2000 National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship PUBLICATIONS (60 TOTAL) * Graduate student, ** Undergraduate student 2018 Pusack TJ, White JW, Garland HG, Kimbro DL, Stallings CD (2018) Size- dependent predation and intraspecific inhibition of an estuarine snail feeding on oysters. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 501: 74-82 2017 Kimbro DL, White JW, Tillotson H, Cox N, Christopher M, Stokes-Cawley O, Yuan S, Pusack TJ, Stallings CD (2017) Local and regional stressors interact to drive a salinization-induced outbreak of predators on Florida oyster reefs. Ecosphere 8: e01992 *Hanmer J, White JW, Pawlik JR (2017) Application of diet theory reveals context-dependent foraging preferences in an herbivorous coral reef fish. Oecologia 184: 127-137 White JW, Cole BJ, Cherr GN, Connon RE, Brander SM (2017) Scaling up endocrine disruption effects from individuals from populations: outcomes depend on how many males a population needs. Environmental Science and Technology 51: 1802-1810 Kimbro DL, Grabowski JH, Hughes AR, Piehler MF, White JW (2017) Nonconsumptive effects of a predator weaken then rebound over time. Ecology 98: 656-667 2016 White JW, Nickols KJ, Malone D, Carr MH, Starr RM, Cordoleani F, Baskett ML, Hastings A, Botsford LW (2016) Fitting state-space integral projection models to size-structured time series data to estimate unknown parameters. Ecological Applications 26: 2675-2692 *Hameed SO, White JW, Nickols KJ, Miller SH, Morgan SG (2016) Coupled larval production and settlement reveals limited population connectivity along 700 km of wave-swept open coast. Proceedings of the Royal Society (B) 283: 20160370 *Dingeldein AL, White JW (2016) Larval traits carry over to affect post-settlement behaviour in a common coral reef fish. Journal of Animal Ecology 85: 903-914 Brander SM, Jeffries KM, Cole BJ, *DeCourten BM, White JW, Hasenbein S, Fangue NA, Connon RE (2016) Transcriptomic changes correspond with altered egg protein production and reduced fecundity in an estuarine model fish species exposed to bifenthrin. Aquatic Toxicology 174: 247-260 J. Wilson White CV 2/7/18 p. 4 *Easter EE, White JW (2016) Spatial management for protogynous sex-changing fishes: a general framework for coastal systems. Marine Ecology Progress Series 543: 223-249 **McCarthy EK, White JW (2016) Density-dependent prey mortality is determined by the spatial scale of predator foraging. Oecologia 180: 305-311 2015 *Heintz MM, Brander SM, White JW (2015) Endocrine disrupting compounds alter risk-taking behavior in fish (Poecelia reticulata). Ethology 121: 480-491 White JW (2015) Marine reserve design theory for species with ontogenetic migration. Biology Letters 11: 20140511 Nickols KJ, White JW, Gaylord B, Largier JL (2015) Marine population connectivity: reconciling large-scale dispersal and high self-retention. American Naturalist 185: 196-211 2014 White JW, Morgan SG, Fisher JL (2014) Planktonic larval mortality rates are lower than widely expected. Ecology 95: 3344-3353 White JW, **Schroeger J, Drake PT, Edwards CA (2014) The value of larval connectivity information in the static optimization of marine reserve design. Conservation Letters 7: 533-544 Wang HY, Botsford LW, White JW, Fogarty MJ, Juanes F, Hastings A, Holland MD, Brander K (2014) The influence of temperature on life histories sets the sensitivity of Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua, to fishing. Marine Ecology Progress Series 514: 217-229 **Birk MA, White JW (2014) Experimental determination of the spatial scale of a prey patch from the predator's perspective. Oecologia 174: 723-729 White JW, Rassweiler A, Samhouri JF, Stier AC, White C. (2014) Ecologists should not use statistical significance tests to interpret simulation model results. Oikos 123: 385-389 Burgess SC, Nickols KJ, Griesemer CD, Barnett LAK, Dedrick AG, Satterthwaite EV, Yamane L, Morgan SG, White JW, Botsford LW (2014) Beyond connectivity: how empirical methods can quantify population persistence to improve marine protected area design. Ecological Applications 24: 257-270 Stier AC=, White JW= (2014) Predator density and the functional response of coral reef fish. Coral Reefs 33: 235-240 =These authors contributed equally J. Wilson White CV 2/7/18 p. 5 White JW, Botsford LW, Hastings A, Holland MD (2014) Stochastic models reveal conditions for cyclic dominance in sockeye salmon populations. Ecological Monographs 84: 69-90 2013 Brander SM, Connon RE, He G, Hobbs JA, Smalling KL, Teh SJ, White JW, Werner I, Denison MS, Cherr GN (2013) From ‘omics to otoliths: responses of an estuarine fish to endocrine disrupting compounds across biological scales. PLOS ONE 8: e74521 *Midway SR, White JW, Roumillat W, Batsavage C, Scharf FS (2013) Improving macroscopic maturity determination in a pre-spawning flatfish through predictive modeling and whole mount methods. Fisheries Research 147: 359-369 Moffitt EA, White JW, Botsford LW (2013) Accurate assessment of marine protected area success depends on metric and spatiotemporal scale of monitoring. Marine Ecology Progress Series 489: 17-28 White JW, Botsford LW, Hastings A, Baskett ML, Kaplan DM, Barnett LAK (2013) Transient responses of fished populations to marine reserve establishment. Conservation Letters 6: 180-191 Miller SH, Morgan SG, White JW, Green PG (2013) Can trace element signatures in larval soft tissues reveal dispersal and population connectivity? Marine Ecology
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Marine Protected Areas (Mpas) in Management 1 of Coral Reefs
    ISRS BRIEFING PAPER 1 MARINE PROTECTED AREAS (MPAS) IN MANAGEMENT 1 OF CORAL REEFS SYNOPSIS Marine protected areas (MPAs) may stop all extractive uses, protect particular species or locally prohibit specific kinds of fishing. These areas may be established for reasons of conservation, tourism or fisheries management. This briefing paper discusses the potential uses of MPAs, factors that have affected their success and the conditions under which they are likely to be effective. ¾ MPAs are often established as a conservation tool, allowing protection of species sensitive to fishing and thus preserving intact ecosystems, their processes and biodiversity and ultimately their resilience to perturbations. ¾ Increases in charismatic species such as large groupers in MPAs combined with the perception that the reefs there are relatively pristine mean that MPAs can play a significant role in tourism. ¾ By reducing fishing mortality, effective MPAs have positive effects locally on abundances, biomass, sizes and reproductive outputs of many exploitable site- attached reef species. ¾ Because high biomass of focal species is sought but this is quickly depleted and is slow to recover, poaching is a problem in most reef MPAs. ¾ Target-species ‘spillover’ into fishing areas is likely occurring close to the MPA boundaries and benefits will often be related to MPA size. Evidence for MPAs acting as a source of larval export remains weak. ¾ The science of MPAs is at an early stage of its development and MPAs will rarely suffice alone to address the main objectives of fisheries management; concomitant control of effort and other measures are needed to reduce fishery impacts, sustain yields or help stocks to recover.
    [Show full text]
  • Critical Habitats and Biodiversity: Inventory, Thresholds and Governance
    Commissioned by BLUE PAPER Summary for Decision-Makers Critical Habitats and Biodiversity: Inventory, Thresholds and Governance Global biodiversity loss results from decades of unsustainable use of the marine environment and rep- resents a major threat to the ecosystem services on which we, and future generations, depend. In the past century, overexploitation of fisheries and the effects of bycatch have caused species to decline whilst coastal reclamation and land-use change—together with pollution and, increasingly, climate change—have led to vast losses of many valuable coastal habitats, estimated at an average of 30–50 percent.1 Despite advances in understanding how marine species and habitats are distributed in the ocean, trends in marine biodiversity are difficult to ascertain. This results from the very patchy state of knowl- edge of marine biodiversity, which leads to biases in understanding different geographic areas, groups of species, habitat distribution and patterns of decline. To address the data gap in our understanding of marine biodiversity and ecosystem integrity, it is crucial to establish the capacity to assess current baselines and trends through survey and monitoring activities. Only increased knowledge and understanding of the above will be able to inform ocean manage- ment and conservation strategies capable of reversing the current loss trend in marine biodiversity. A new paper2 commissioned by the High Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy increases our understanding of these trends by analysing the links between biodiversity and ecosystem functioning (including tipping points for degradation) and unpacks the link between protection and gross domes- tic product (GDP). In doing so, the paper provides an updated catalogue of marine habitats and biodiversity and outlines five priorities for changing the current trajectory of decline.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Protected Areas
    Marine Protected Areas Read the passage below. How do oceans affect you? If you live far from the coast, you might think they don’t. But life on this planet depends on the oceans. They cover almost three-quarters of the planet and hold 97 percent of the Earth’s water. The phytoplankton that live on the oceans’ surface produce 70 percent of the oxygen in the atmosphere. Oceans are a vital source of food and other resources, and an economic engine for many communities. For all the oceans provide us, we haven’t always been so responsible in our stewardship. “The ocean was thought of as a dumping ground for so long,” says Caitlyn Toropova of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). “There was a sense that there was no way we could harm it because it is so vast.” But human activities are having a negative impact on many of the world’s oceans, jeopardizing marine life, habitat, and ecosystems. These threats include overfishing or destructive fishing, coastal development, pollution and runoff, and the introduction of non-native species. Climate change is also having a big effect by causing warming seas and rising acidification. The realization that something needs to be done to stem or reverse the damage has led to the creation of Marine Protected Areas (MPAs). Broadly speaking, marine protected areas are regions of the ocean where human activity is limited. Specifics differ around the globe, but the United States defines a marine protected area as “any area of the marine environment that has been reserved by federal, state, tribal, territorial, or local laws or regulations to provide lasting protection for part or all of the natural and cultural resources therein.” There are approximately 5,000 designated MPAs around the world, and many more that are not officially recognized, says Toropova, the conservation group’s coordination officer for marine protected areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Multi-Zone Marine Protected Areas: Assessment of Ecosystem and Fisheries Benefits Using Multiple Ecosystem Models X
    Multi-zone marine protected areas: assessment of ecosystem and fisheries benefits using multiple ecosystem models X. Corrales, D. Vilas, C. Piroddi, J. Steenbeek, Joachim Claudet, J. Lloret, A. Calò, A. Di Franco, T. Font, A. Ligas, et al. To cite this version: X. Corrales, D. Vilas, C. Piroddi, J. Steenbeek, Joachim Claudet, et al.. Multi-zone marine pro- tected areas: assessment of ecosystem and fisheries benefits using multiple ecosystem models. Ocean and Coastal Management, Elsevier, 2020, 193, pp.105232. 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2020.105232. hal- 03034139 HAL Id: hal-03034139 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03034139 Submitted on 1 Dec 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. Copyright 1 To be re-submitted to Ocean and Coastal Management 2 Multi-zone marine protected areas: assessment of ecosystem and fisheries 3 benefits using multiple ecosystem models 4 Corrales, X.1,2,3; Vilas, D.1,2,4,5; Piroddi, C.6; Steenbeek, J.2; Claudet, J.7; Lloret, J.8; Calò, 5 A.9,10; Di Franco, A.9,11; Font, T.8; Ligas, A.12; Prato, G.13; Sahyoun, R.13; Sartor, P.12; 6 Guidetti, P.9,14; Coll, M.1,2.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Protection in America's Ocean
    SeaStates 2021 Marine Protection in America’s Ocean MARINE PROTECTION ATLAS SeaStates 2021 Marine Protection in America’s Ocean SeaStates 2021 Marine Protection in America’s Ocean SeaStates 2021 is a rigorous, quantitative accounting of fully and words marine reserve or marine protected area are used. Protect- strongly protected MPAs in America’s ocean updated annually by ing biodiversity in marine reserves increases the abundance and Sardines swirl amongst giant kelp off Anacapa Island, part the team at MPAtlas.org. First published in 2013, our annual reports diversity of marine life inside the reserve and typically results in of the Channel Islands National Marine Sanctuary. Federal are intended to measure US progress as a whole, and state prog- the export of marine life to surrounding areas4,5. In short, no-take and state authorities co-manage the MPA complex in the Channel Islands which includes a network of fully protected ress towards effective marine protection in their coastal waters. MPAs effectively protect marine life, can secure food resources areas surrounded by the highly protected sanctuary zone. Oceans are essential to human survival and prosperity, yet our for millions of people by exporting fish outside the MPA, and Marine Conservation Institute has recognized the Northern Channel Islands with a platinum-level Blue Parks award. activities are damaging many ecosystems and pushing numerous prevent loss of species. Strongly protected areas are those in (credit Robert Schwemmer, NOAA) critical marine species toward extinction1. Many marine biologists which extraction is quite limited and conservation benefits are high but not as high as fully protected areas.
    [Show full text]
  • Guidelines for Marine Protected Areas
    Guidelines for Marine Protected Areas World Commission on Protected Areas (WCPA) Guidelines for Marine MPAs are needed in all parts of the world – but it is vital to get the support Protected Areas of local communities Edited and coordinated by Graeme Kelleher Adrian Phillips, Series Editor IUCN Protected Areas Programme IUCN Publications Services Unit Rue Mauverney 28 219c Huntingdon Road CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland Cambridge, CB3 0DL, UK Tel: + 41 22 999 00 01 Tel: + 44 1223 277894 Fax: + 41 22 999 00 15 Fax: + 44 1223 277175 E-mail: [email protected] E-mail: [email protected] Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No. 3 IUCN The World Conservation Union The World Conservation Union CZM-Centre These Guidelines are designed to be used in association with other publications which cover relevant subjects in greater detail. In particular, users are encouraged to refer to the following: Case studies of MPAs and their Volume 8, No 2 of PARKS magazine (1998) contributions to fisheries Existing MPAs and priorities for A Global Representative System of Marine establishment and management Protected Areas, edited by Graeme Kelleher, Chris Bleakley and Sue Wells. Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority, The World Bank, and IUCN. 4 vols. 1995 Planning and managing MPAs Marine and Coastal Protected Areas: A Guide for Planners and Managers, edited by R.V. Salm and J.R. Clark. IUCN, 1984. Integrated ecosystem management The Contributions of Science to Integrated Coastal Management. GESAMP, 1996 Systems design of protected areas National System Planning for Protected Areas, by Adrian G. Davey. Best Practice Protected Area Guidelines Series No.
    [Show full text]
  • CHAPTER 5 Ecopath with Ecosim: Linking Fisheries and Ecology
    CHAPTER 5 Ecopath with Ecosim: linking fi sheries and ecology V. Christensen Fisheries Centre, University of British Columbia, Canada. 1 Why ecosystem modeling in fi sheries? Fifty years ago, fi sheries science emerged as a quantitative discipline with the publication of Ray Beverton and Sidney Holt’s [1] seminal volume On the Dynamics of Exploited Fish Populations. This book provided the foundation for how to manage fi sheries and was based on detailed, mathe- matical analyses of the dynamics of individual fi sh populations, of how they grow and how they are affected by fi shing. Fisheries science has developed and matured since then, and remarkably much of what has been achieved are modifi cations and further developments of what Beverton and Holt introduced. Given then that fi sheries science has developed to become one of the most data-rich, quantita- tive fi elds in ecology [2], how well has it fared? We often see fi sheries issues in the headlines and usually in a negative context and there are indeed many threats to the sustainability of ocean resources [3]. Many, judging not the least from newspaper headlines, consider fi sheries manage- ment a usual suspect in connection with fi sheries collapses. This may lead one to suspect that there is a problem with the science, but I hold this to be an erroneous conclusion. It should be stressed that the main problem is not to be found in the computational aspects of the science, but rather in how management advice actually is implemented in praxis [4]. The major force in fi sh- eries throughout the world is excessive fi shing capacity; the days with unexploited resources and untapped oceans are over [5], and the fi shing industry is now relying heavily on subsidies to keep the machinery going [6].
    [Show full text]
  • AN INTRODUCTION to the MPA GUIDE • Conserving Biodiversity in the Global Ocean • Reflecting Shared Goals by Refining Shared Language
    For a PDF version of The MPA Guide, go to https://www.protectedplanet.net/c/mpa-guide Momentum to protect the global ocean and to use Marine Protected Areas (MPAs) as a conservation tool is greater than it has ever been. But realizing the potential will require a common, shared language to understand, celebrate and track achievements and provide clarity about our collective, science-based goal. AN INTRODUCTION TO THE MPA GUIDE • Conserving biodiversity in the global ocean • Reflecting shared goals by refining shared language THE MARINE PROTECTED AREA (MPA) GUIDE refines existing means. While the global community works to refine language and captures a shared vision to describe MPAs understanding of OECMs, this document focuses on MPAs. and the conservation outcomes they provide. The Guide is the work of many hundreds of stakeholders from around the Currently there are different interpretations about what the world. It is a timely and important tool to help drive more and term ‘protected’ means in relation to the global ocean. Some better ocean protection and reflects a collective ambition to view protection as the point at which a government approves find unity in language and consistency in approach. the creation of an MPA in law or other authority; others view it as the point at which protection measures are put in place with on-the-water changes in management; others view it as THE NEED a measure of the effectiveness of the protection. As a result, MPAs are a central tool for ocean conservation. They are there are different conclusions about how much of the ocean clearly defined by IUCN as areas whose primary objective is ‘protected’ in MPAs.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Protected Area Design and the Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Cetaceans in a Submarine Canyon
    Marine Protected Area Design and the Spatial and Temporal Distribution of Cetaceans in a Submarine Canyon SASCHA K. HOOKER,* HAL WHITEHEAD, AND SHANNON GOWANS Department of Biology, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia B3H 4J1, Canada Abstract: The Gully, the largest submarine canyon off the coast of eastern Canada, is currently under consid- eration as a marine conservation area, primarily because of the increasing interest in oil and gas production on the Scotian Shelf. Cetaceans, as a guild of abundant, large organisms that are relatively sensitive to such threats, provide a reliable means to determine the boundaries for a conservation area in this region. We com- pared the abundance of cetaceans between the Gully and other parts of the Scotian Shelf and Slope and found that abundance was higher in the Gully. We also assessed cetacean distribution and relative abun- dance within the Gully relative to search effort for several spatial and temporal parameters: depth, slope, sea surface temperature, and month. Distribution within the Gully was most strongly correlated with depth, but was also significantly correlated with sea surface temperature and month. Five of the 11 cetacean species commonly found in the Gully, and all those for which the Gully formed significant habitat on the Scotian Shelf, were concentrated in the deep (200–2000 m) mouth of the canyon. We suggest that a year-round ma- rine protected area is necessary for the Gully. A core protection zone should be defined in the Gully based on depth and bounded by the 200-m isobath. A buffer zone around the core zone should be defined to provide protection from activities with further-reaching effects, such as noise, dredging, and chemical pollution.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Reserves Solve an Important Bycatch Problem in Fisheries
    Marine reserves solve an important bycatch problem INAUGURAL ARTICLE in fisheries Alan Hastingsa,1, Steven D. Gainesb, and Christopher Costellob aDepartment of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California, Davis, CA 95616; and bBren School of Environmental Science & Management, University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106 This contribution is part of the special series of Inaugural Articles by members of the National Academy of Sciences elected in 2015. Contributed by Alan Hastings, July 12, 2017 (sent for review March 29, 2017; reviewed by Fred´ eric´ Guichard and Guillermo E. Herrera) Management of the diverse fisheries of the world has had mixed stock. The traditional approach for doing so requires reducing success. While managing single species in data-rich environments catch rates of all species; this often involves unacceptably high has been largely effective, perhaps the greatest challenge facing costs (8). While we focus on strong stock yield, in some cases, fishery managers is how to deal with mixed stocks of fish with there may also be small economic benefits from the weak stock. a range of life histories that reside in the same location. Because In those cases, our strategic approach will also provide general many fishing gears are nonselective, and the costs of making gear guidance. Here, we show, using simple multispecies models, that selective can be high, a particular problem is bycatch of weak a surprisingly effective solution may lie in the use of fisheries stocks. This problem is most severe when the weak stock is long- management incorporating marine reserves. If the weak stock lived and has low fecundity and thus requires a very long recovery is longer-lived and matures later than the target species, man- time once overfished.
    [Show full text]
  • Marine Protected Areas
    MARINE PROTECTED AREAS INTERNATIONAL FRAMEWORK, STATE OF THE ART, THE BELGIAN SITUATION Rabaut, M., Cliquet, A., and Maes, F. Table of Content TABLE OF CONTENT I. Introduction..................................................................................................................................................1 II. Analysis.........................................................................................................................................................3 1 International Framework for MPAs ..........................................................................................................3 1.1 Global Agreements...............................................................................................................................3 1.1.1 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................3 1.1.2 UNCLOS, Law of the Sea Convention (1982) ................................................................................3 1.1.3 CBD, Convention on Biological Diversity (1992) ..........................................................................3 1.1.4 Global Protected Area Conventions and Programmes.....................................................................4 1.1.4.1 Ramsar convention on Wetlands of International Importance (1971)....................................4 1.1.4.2 World Heritage Convention (UNESCO, 1972)......................................................................4 1.1.4.3 MAB,
    [Show full text]
  • The Benefits of MARINE PROTECTED AREAS © Commonwealth of Australia 2003 ISBN 0 642 54949 4
    TheThe benefitsbenefits ofof MMARINEARINE PROTECTEDPROTECTED AREASAREAS The benefits of MARINE PROTECTED AREAS © Commonwealth of Australia 2003 ISBN 0 642 54949 4 Information contained in this document may be copied for study, research, information or educational purposes, subject to inclusion of acknowledgment of the source. Photography courtesy of the Great Barrier Marine Park Authority. This document has been prepared by the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage from material supplied by Richard Kenchington, Trevor Ward, and Eddie Hegerl. A technical support paper is also included in this resource kit, providing more details on current issues and practice for those who have not yet been involved in the processes of creation and management of marine protected areas. This summary of the benefits of marine protected areas is based on the scientific contributions of numerous authors. We acknowledge these sources, and specific contributions are cited in the accompanying technical support paper. THE BENEFITS OF MARINE PROTECTED AREAS CONTENTS What is a marine protected area? 4 Why do we need marine protected areas? 4 The role of MPAs in protecting marine habitats and biodiversity 5 Conserving biodiversity and ecosystems 6 How do MPAs benefit fisheries? 8 How do MPAs benefit tourism? 13 What are the broader benefits of MPAs? 15 Education, training, heritage and culture 17 MPAs and research 19 3. THE BENEFITS OF MARINE PROTECTED AREAS What is a marine protected area? marine resources for seafood. The global fish catch has been in consistent decline since 1989 and the downward A marine protected area (MPA) is an area of sea especially trend is projected to continue.
    [Show full text]